Shy Impeachment Syndrome

Drain The Swamp 87 Comments

When events take a turn for the bizarre — such as Nancy Pelosi’s sudden reluctance to send her impeachment articles to Senate trial — it’s often the signal of an unknown unknown. As predicted some days ago (though I didn’t link it at the time, but did take note) by @TheLastRefuge2;

1) I don’t like gaming stuff out by thinking like this Lawfare crew, but…

2) There is a possibility…

3) This impeachment could be a disposable first step.
Call it impeachment 1.0

4) They use this impeachment to get the judicial authority to penetrate the constitutional firewall.

A pending senate trial gives them an argument in court for their pre-existing cases.
5) The real goal of impeachment 1.0 is the evidence they seek. (1) Mueller 6e material. (2) McGahn as a witness. and (3) the financials/taxes.

And that looks to be bang on.

BREAKING: House Argues in Court Filing Don McGahn Testimony Needed for Impeachment Evidence…

And that’s why Nancy stammers.

She didn’t hatch the plan, isn’t in control of it, and thus hasn’t the knowledge or confidence required to lie convincingly.

87 Replies to “Shy Impeachment Syndrome”

  1. “She didn’t hatch the plan, isn’t in control of it, and thus hasn’t the knowledge or confidence required to lie convincingly. ”

    Or maybe the old girl is pissed.

    The Senate should just hold their trial based on whatever evidence was presented in the House. If the House wants to impeach him again, they can go for it.

    2. From the Conservative Tree House:
      As we suspected, albeit against much criticism, House counsel Doug Letter has responded to the DC Appeals Court arguing the forced testimony of White House counsel Don McGahn is needed for evidence in impeachment trial.
      That is really strange. “The House” (i.e. Democrats in the House) are claiming they don’t need the testimony to impeach, but need it for the trial, and it is up to the Senate to provide that testimony? That is, they admitted they impeached without sufficient evidence.
      If the House counsel were the prosecutor in a court case, and said that to the presiding judge, the case would be thrown out of court pronto. And there is no reason why it shouldn’t be here.

    3. Scar, that can be done, they can also refuse to consider it based on the lack of constitutional accuracy, in other words fraud.

    4. This post:
      https://www.thepostemail.com/2019/12/22/scotus-no-articles-of-impeachment-or-a-trial-are-required-for-the-senate-to-acquit-president-trump/
      describes a 1993 SCOTUS nine to nothing decision on impeachment. In that case it was a federal judge that was impeached, and he didn’t like the outcome or the way in which the trial was conducted, so he appealed to the Supreme Court. The decision basically said first, impeachment happens when the House votes to impeach. Second the Senate can do the trial whenever and however ever they want. The Senate doesn’t have to wait for articles of impeachment if they don’t want to. Read the article. Read the decision.

  2. If it’s ultimately going to be about damage control, the Senate needs to use this as an opportunity to release all the damning evidence we’ve been promised for years now, leading all the way up the chain to the top of the Obama administration.

    Either that or dismiss it outright. I’m no constitutional lawyer but there’s been interesting buzz about how Trump hasn’t even been officially impeached because of Pelosi’s hold-out in handing things off to the Senate.

  3. No need for conspiracies when the simple explanation makes most sense:

    Republicans in the senate have publicly stated they want to shut down the trial as fast as possible without looking at any evidence because they are partisan hacks who don’t care about right or wrong or anything that an objective observer would call ethics or morality.

    Given this context, Pelosi’s using the delay to ensure the impeachment will be given the proper consideration it deserves (remember that any intellectually honest person should be able to acknowledge Trump is guilty as charged and the only real question is whether he should be removed from office because of it)

    Also remember that the Trump refused to allow witnesses to testify during impeachment so it is ridiculous to say that all the witnesses have been heard. It is so pathetic that Trump was able to get away with such blatant obstruction of justice. No private citizen would not be allowed to block testimony from witnesses. At most, they could have got the testimony sealed if facts unrelated to the charges came out.

    1. The links include documents that prove precisely what was explained — and you didn’t bother reading any of it.

      Something tells me “testimony” isn’t what drives your opinions.

      1. Huh? How does change what I said? The op says want access to material they should have had when the impeachment proceedings were going on. So what. That does not make Pelosi wrong or even unreasonable.

        I also made it clear that the evidence presented so far makes it painfully obvious to anyone who is not a partisan that Trump is guilty as charged (on seeking to compel a foreign power to meddle in a US election and on obstruction of justice by refusing to allow witnesses to testify and attempting to intimidate those that did). So the testimony is not that relevant at this point. What is needed are Republicans who are honest enough to ask themselves what they would do if a Democratic president did what Trump has done? I don’t believe any of them would accept such behavior from a Democratic president and should never be acceptable just because it is a Republican. Trump is just one guy. The republican party should be more than than the Trump party.

        1. What is wrong with a foreign power, or foreign bodies, trying to influence an American election?

          The Russians have been doing it for many years. As have other countries.

          And the Americans have been doing it to other countries for even longer.

        3. spoken like a true democrat..

          let’s hear from the non whistleblower and Hunter Biden the addict, fraud & bring old Joe 30330 along with him…That would be good for a laugh or 2?? NO EVIDENCE WAS PRODUCED by the sham impeachment……..NONE

        4. TimG, you are a partisan democrat hack who is more than willing to accept the lies put out by the democrat party. Liars, each and every one.

        5. Clear to whom? To anyone not totally deluded? Compel a foreign power to meddle in an election? Get some meds.

          This blathering obfuscation has gotten old and nobody cares about impeachment or impairment or any slur.

          Want to play partisan. Go for it I say – Yippee-Ki-Yay – DeMarxists live by the sword, let them die by the sword in 2020.

          I want to make it clear the evidence presented so far makes it obvious the whole Ukraine bit, like Russia, like 2018 House promises, the MLK statue, Melania’s running shoes – is all partisan bullshit, in fact a hoax set up.

          Not only that it’s abundantly clear that senior members of the Obama administration broke the law and lied about it.

          It’s also abundantly clear the entire Dem party, including but not limited to Schiff, lied, lied, lied, about Russia.

          It’s also abundantly clear the Democrat party has completely lost sight of the Constitution, shredding it variously.

          That’s all painfully obvious to anyone who is not a partisan. So what, it’s war, your crazy comments show that.

        6. Actually, according to the evidence, President Trump is guilty of acting like The President of The United States. Any reasonable person who is not a partisan can not reach any other conclusion.

          Those who think it proves otherwise are idiots.

          TimG has self-identified as an idiot. And I voted for Hillary in 2016.

        7. interpreting lil Fascist Timmy’s words:
          “compel”= casually ask
          “meddle” = means investigate obvious Biden crime family kickbacks of U.S. taxpayer dollars from corrupt Burisma
          obstruction of justice means assert executive priveledge, as the Kenyan Muslim commie thug did many times during his reign of crime 2009-2016.
          “intimidate” = poke fun at infantile fascist Leftists and their impotent rage.

    2. The Demarxists are making circular arguments, trying to justify their witch hunt based on implications of the Fraud of the Russia Russia Russia HOAX.

      The Grand Jury testimony is protected by previous precedent, and, have you ever heard of Executive Privilege???? No, not invented by Trump, its a longstanding respected procedure and confidential protection.

      TDS truly turns the brain off, just leaving the emotional center on overload

      The Demarxist Horde is intent on destroying all sense respect for law and order, based on their raw lust for power

      1. It is not a witch hunt when the accused are actually guilty.

        In this case, Trump sought to have a foreign power meddle in a US election on his behalf. The transcript of the calls show this on their own.

        Executive privilege is NEVER absolute. Congress has the right and responsibility to investigate the president even if those investigations reveal that nothing wrong occurred. The notion that executive privilege can be used as means to avoid being held accountable for malfeasance is absurd.

        BTW, I am conservative who actually prefers most of Trump’s policies. My issue is he is an unethical scumbag and I think the GOP would be better served if it found a candidate that had something resembling a moral compass.

        2. timmy, and he had a duty to ask for an investigation, the same people who run Burisma are big DemoKKKraps supporter. Crack head hunter is now under criminal investigation, along with some other, Like Ketchup’s som in law, a lot of birty DemoKKKraps are turning up. Bigest problems the DIMs have, is Trump’s asking about crowd strike, and I bet I would need to explain that to a fool like you. So President Trump has done SFA wrong, Besides stupidity, do you have another strong suites????Asking for my dog, he’s smarter than you

        3. Tim,

          We’re not stupid. “Russian” is a dog-whistle for Jew. You clearly believe that Donald Trump was thrust into office by a Jewish cabal.

          You probably have a problem with Jews because you can only get an erection by thinking about screwing little boys, and Judaism has a problem with sodomy. You must think that if there were no Jews you could screw little boys to your heart’s content.

          See those glands between your legs? Ask a vet to help you chop them off. Then, once cured of your paraphilia, maybe you’ll be ready to have an adult conversation about US politics referring only to facts and reality and prioritizing the future of the republic over your disgusting sexual urges.

          Scratch a Trump Derangement Syndrome case hard enough, and you’ll find a kiddy-diddler, a Yid-basher, or (most often) both.

          1. “We’re not stupid.
            You are and so is Tim, just two opposite sides of the same stupid coin.

            “Russian” is a dog-whistle for Jew.”
            Nope, nothing do with Jew, nothing to do with Russian either. Just a cynical campaign to undermine the democratically elected president. From day one there was not a shred of legitimacy to it. They can’t stand they have lost control and are using every dirty trick in the book to get it back. That is all. Nothing more. Period. End of story.

        4. Did CBC or CNN tell you to think that? Back to the eggnog, it will help take the rough edges off your TDS

        5. Sorry, Timmy, but the US did create a Constitution so that there is a separation of powers, so that, for instance, the government would not be a dictatorship of one branch, or PART of one branch – the House of Representatives. Because the House, in the end is run by one person, the Speaker.

          The President is no more required to accede to her demands, than he is to accede to the leader of any other collection of 238 deranged totalitarians. The Speaker is power mad, and President Trump perfectly summed up this depraved effort to remove him in his Tweet: “. In reality they are not after me. They are after you. I’m just in the way. “ Exactly.

          And that is exactly why the House Democrats must not just be defeated, but punished for this attempted coup.

        6. What foreign power election meddling are you talking about.Biden had not even declared that he was a candidate for the democratic nomination when President Trump spoke to the Ukranian President regarding the situation that Joe Biden bragged about himself. He was quite proud of the fact that he was able to have a prosecutor fired, the same prosecutor that was about to charge his son with serious crimes.

        7. WRONG! Trump did NOT ask for foreign interference in “an election”. That tired, oft repeated, FALSE accusation is an opinion, not a FACT. What Trump actually did was to ask for cooperation from the New President of Ukraine in investigating widespread corruption by American citizens and the Ukrainian govt. A perfectly legitimate request by the POTUS. This entire impeachment is a FARCE built on a flimsy interpretation of Trump’s words and actions. It deserves no more “witnesses”, and no deliberation by the Senate. Show the Senate what the House drafted, and get on with it.

          But this does reveal what the leftists will DO to seize power and control of the US government (and taxpayer $$$$) . The Democrats attempted a coup, now … a sham impeachment … I fully expect they will try assassination. After all … Epstein did NOT commit suicide.

          1. Kenji, the Founding Fathers would have purged these lying democrats and charged them with treason and gallows would be erected on the mall.

        8. Scumbag is a used condom. Interesting use. Of course, Trump is anything but “used”. A self made billionaire in the building and urban realestate. Something YOU could not do. A best selling author and pretty much the inventor of reality TV. None of which YOU can claim. Trump waited until his senses told him and plowed through the GOP primary like a destroyer through dingys, and underspent and overhustled the anointed Hillery to capture the Presidency. Not that YOU could do that.
          I’m sorry he offends your kit glove, nancy shoes, mommy I got pushed in the hallway sensibilities. YOU poor flower. Maybe no one told you politics is fastball, head high.( See the Roosevelt’s, JFK, LBJ, the Clintons, vs say Mittens Romney, Loser. )

          But back to scum. Sperm. Sex, that YOU expressed. I guess its the beautiful woman he has had, and has, and you never did.
          But pro tip Buttercups, women love winners. Love fighters. You should at least try and you, might, not be so lonely ….all your life.

        9. Saying ; ” I’m a conservative but Trump is a scumbag”
          makes as much sense as saying ;” I m not a racist but I hate niggers”

          Saying Republicans are immoral and unethical when it was democrats who paid corrupt people to fabricate the Steele dossier, to obtain FISA warrants to spy on Trump ( ohhh how moral is that ) , and then doctored some documents to obtain more FISA warrants ( ethical you say ? )to do more spying

          funny how all the unethical and immoral things democrats did don t exist in your universe.

          Did you know that when Bill CLinton was President Ukraine and the USA signed an accord in which it states clearly that during criminal investigations, both nations will exchange information?

          what am I getting at? Trump asking for Ukraine to help in an investigation is not only ethical (thus moral), but it is perfectly LEGAL.

          that document was ratified on october 18 2000

          google it

        10. Gotta love it when Lefty Democrats try to inject some form of insulation to their weirdo comments by saying things like “BTW, I am conservative who actually prefers most of Trump’s policies.”
          So you are a Lefty and a complete liar. You could knock me over with a feather.

        11. Oh great another RINO who ensure GOP defeat every time. In Canada they’re known as cannibal conservatives.
          You have provided zero evidence of any of the crap you purport. That’s because it’s not true, it’s an opinion.
          Everybody has one. Yours is ill-informed and/or addled by some pathological issue with Trump that dominates you.

        14. And it is a witch hunt when the accused is not actually guilty. You have already concluded that anyone who doesn’t agree with you is ignoring the facts. That is YOUR opinion and you are entitled to it. I have a different opinion and, like you, I am entitled to mine. Fair is fair. You can say that Trump must be guilty because the House voted to impeach. And I will say, “so what”. The Democrats in the House voted for impeachment and the Republicans did not. If that is fair then when the Senate votes, that will also be fair. So we’re good here.

    3. timmy, yer comprehension skills are highly suspect, I ‘v been following this schitt show quite closely, and Trump has done nothing wrong. There is a clause in the constitution that firewalls the different branches, and Trump has been rightfully using that fire wall, and that IS NOT obstruction, period Even lefty constitutional Lawyers agree to that, and you are not a constitutional lawyer, or a lawyer, or very well informed, or smart to the lowest bar period.

      1. The Executive Branch of government is elected by ALL the people of the USA. Because of this … the executive is untouchable, except for impeachment for … read it with me you lawfare fkcus… “HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS”. Not for threatening to reveal HER corruption in Ukraine … or Hunter Biden’s money for nothing under direct threat of cancelling aid. Neither are high crimes or misdemeanors. And the POTUS is protected from prosecution while in office, otherwise the opposing political Party(s) would file lawsuit after lawsuit to obstruct the POTUS from his duties … and cancel the vote of the people … all the people.

        It is sickening to witness what the Demo-cretins are doing to our Constitution. What they are doing to our nation.

    4. I don’t believe that your analysis is correct. Trump only blocked witnesses when they refused the formal impeachment process, during the period when impeachment was just being considered.
      There is no evidence that Trump was withholding money from the Ukraine to force them to investigate. Did not happen. Dems made it up and the “whistleblower” is entirely phony.
      This impeachment is nothing but a Democrat political ploy. Senate should just dismiss it a.s.a.p.

      1. “There is no evidence that Trump was withholding money from the Ukraine to force them to investigate. ”

        Moreover if he did, it would be perfectly fine. Biden is a criminal and if Ukraine wants US help they should help investigate the criminal.

    7. “Trump refused to allow witnesses to testify during impeachmen”

      So while you’re burning down the house to get Trump BAMN, you’re willing to throw away executive privilege.

      What other immunities are you willing to throw on the trash heap? Doctor-patient confidentiality? Attorney-client privilege? Spousal testifying protections?

      Thanks, William Roper.

      “William Roper: “So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!”

      Sir Thomas More: “Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?”

      William Roper: “Yes, I’d cut down every law in England to do that!”

      Sir Thomas More: “Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!”

    8. @TimG You may have at some point heard of Executive Privilege . . . it’s not a new concept

    9. No one believes anything you just wrote, least of all the Dems in Congress.

      They know Trump has a right to assert privilege and the proper venue to resolve disputes between coequal branches is to go to the courts. Every president to hold office has asserted executive privilege, but they also know their base is composed entirely of dullards so they pretend it is something terrible and new. It is silly, but people fall for it and reward the Dems for insulting their own intelligence so why shouldn’t they continue to do so?

      The problem for the Dems is that they haven’t alleged anything that is even inappropriate, let alone illegal or impeachable. There is a US interest in cleaning up public corruption of the sort Biden and his son have bragged about engaging in. That it overlaps Trump’s own interests is irrelevant. The impeachment overlaps Democrat interests. So the question is was there legitimate reason to look into Biden’s graft, and the answer is obviously, yes. The case was over when the transcript was released and they lost the thin read of quid pro quo, extortion, bribery, whatever the focus group said that day etc… None of which would have been inappropriate either as all of those things are 90% of diplomacy.

      All you are seeing is that a bunch of these pols have kids who benefit off their parent’s positions to enrich the family and they don’t want to see it end. That is why they are so desperate, and why they are making such asses of themselves with the dance of the seven veils around the shampeachment. They have zero leverage once Wile E Pelosi releases the articles from her ACME Impeachment Kit. They don’t have any leverage now either, but are too dumb to know it. So yeah, the whole thing should be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Butthurt is not an impeachable offense. And there is really no need to hear evidence about a non-offense.

      And what is more. We had a referendum during the last presidential election and Trump won a mandate to end the double standard in our system of justice and to hold people like Biden to account. That was the very thing he ran upon. So it is impossible to argue that the Dems quarrel is with anything but the election results. And it is evidence of mens rea on their part that they made that the charge against Trump. But the whole thing is just silly. We aren’t going to make it impeachable to look into Dem wrongdoing no matter how much they whine. That would be insane.

    10. Good grief, TimG. Are you really so far detached from reality? The Senate will hold a trial if there is evidence to consider. So far, there is none.
      Your statement about Trump not allowing witnesses demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about the relationship between Congress and the President–or alternatively is just garbage thrown out with the hope that someone will buy it. There is a historical concept called Executive Privilege, and not Schiff, Nadler, nor Pelosi can trample it in furtherance of their phony “investigation”. The communications between a President and his Advisors are private, and will remain private long after those three have left the scene..

    11. If the House Leadership had wanted/needed the testimony of those administration officials, all they had to do was to follow the Nixon Model and issue a subpoena and fight that subpoena before any and all relevant courts.
      They did not, so where is the value?

    12. They’ve seen all the evidence from the House trial. Why would that not be considered complete?

    13. You need a dictionary. “Objective” and “intellectually honest” don’t mean what you think they do.

    14. “have publicly stated they want to shut down the trial as fast as possible without looking at any evidence because they are partisan hacks who don’t care about right or wrong or anything that an objective observer would call ethics or morality.”
      They publically stated all that ??? ahhh … no they didn’t … you did … project much ?

    16. “Also remember that Schiff refused to allow witnesses to testify during impeachment so it is ridiculous to say that all the witnesses have been heard. It is so pathetic that Schiff was able to get away with such blatant obstruction of justice. No private citizen would not be allowed to block testimony from witnesses.”

    17. Moron. Trump doesn’t have to prove his innocence, the democrats have to prove his guilt. The democrats will go down in flames over this, their deaf and dumb attitude toward Americans outside of the blue metropolitan areas is stunning.

  4. I think this is more about positioning for the next open seat on the Supreme Court. I wouldn’t be surprised if RBG is reaching the end of her term (quite involuntarily). The closer they can push that nomination process to the election, the more the media can push that no nominations should be made until after Nov. 2020.

    This would explain only having two Articles of Impeachment in limbo. Others could me generated quickly based on information already in possession. More would be produced in a conveyor belt type fashion, one after another. This shuts down the Senate and keeps the nomination process off the table. McConnell was aware of this and floated an immediate Acquittal scenario which caused the Democrats to go ballistic. IMO, that’s why. Also, today, Dems showed up in the media suggesting that they would likely have other articles of impeachment to submit based on McGann’s testimony and acquisition of Trump’s financials…rinse lather repeat.

    Also, today, McConnell stated that he would rule out allowing new witnesses in any Senate trial on impeachment. I think he’s trolling the Dems with that statement.

    1. Cocaine Mitch doesnt have to do ANYTHING for Nanny. She can either file or pound sand, and the message needs to be as blunt. He’s been decisive about that so far.

    2. Orson, yes that is abig part of it, Trump has nominated about 160 justices. Another part is covering up past criminal behavior by some of the players(Dims mostly)

    3. Try it this way:

      Nancy knows RBG isn’t going to make it to the next election.

      Nan sits on the impeachment articles until RBG kicks it.

      Drops them on the Senate with limited time left on the clock.

      Senate has to decide between huge crock of the impeachment or pushing through a replacement for RBG.

      If they go the replacement route they are accused of ‘ignoring the impeachment’ and ‘the appointee cannot be appointed by an impeached President!’

      That’s my take on what Pelosi is trying to do. And, yes, I agree she’s doing it under some sort of third party duress. She’s practically blinking code.

  6. That stupid woman has done more damage, than any one thought possible, to the Botox, Polident and Jack Daniels companies stocks. Slobbering her teeth and speech and a face pulled tighter than a fiddle string is very upsetting. She should marry our pm and they can ah ah ah their way to hell we hope. This old hag has people a lot higher than the old schwartz goul to answer to, she is going through Depends like Tim Hortons goes through coffee.

  7. Might be possible but the Dems have no leverage. The Senate doesn’t want this thing so why does it matter the rest of this?

  8. It would be really funny if they got him subpoenaed, and all he had was a stack of memos that said:

    “Who wants to volunteer to be the guy the Dems come after, but doesn’t actually have any information?”
    “All you got to do is pretend, and we will play these Dems like a fiddle.”

  9. (remember that any intellectually honest person should be able to acknowledge Trump is guilty as charged and the only real question is whether he should be removed from office because of it)
    Intellectual honesty is remembering the media reaction to President Trump’s election, the array of loudly outraged celebrities since then, and the contempt shown by Congress for the person chosen by Americans to lead them.

    1. You are correct, but TimG is a liberal fuuctard who despises the electorate like the Democrats, media, Hollywood elite and other elites.
      He knows nothing of what he speaks and is a useful idiot just like the aforementioned who adore the communist/maxist philosophy.

    2. And also that there are no actual crimes in either article of impeachment. If there are no crimes, how can he be charged with anything? I guess he is “guilty” of liking cheese on his burgers? Or something? Is that the “crime” you are “alleging” here that he is “guilty” of?

  10. That is exactly the same speech I gave to my wife after I opened a second bottle of wine. So Pelosi is a plagiarist … and incoherent stealer of other people’s thoughts.

  15. The underlying problem here is that half the rebublicans including Mitch and Lindsay are dirty.

    So justice being served or the guilty being held accountable is about the last thing you will see.

    Trump needs to be careful.

    Neither Mitch or Lindsay have his back. They have much to lose if the dominos start to fall.

    So their play is to stall and divert toward supporting the goals of the Dems.

    Of course it will be dressed up as trying to fight the dems and then they will lose.

    When hasn’t this happened?

    1. Only half?!? I wouldn’t bet there five members of the house and senate that could survive more than a passing glance by a competent, honest investigator. So now all those crooks have to decide If they want to face the investigations trump has promised, or the rough justice they may face if they prevent him from delivering on those promises.

  16. No one can doubt Nancy’s nonsense and the reasons for it are legion. She is likely just a puppet acting on behalf of the globalist cabal. However one thing that hasn’t been mentioned is the idea that this is Nancy’s power play. Having impeached the president she hopes to influence his policy (dictate more accurate word) and by withholding the articles she is trying to dictate how the senate works. Her multiple power (if she were successful) would make her dictator of the US. From princess polygrip to queen of quirk in one fell swoop. Well that and she is trying to cover up demoncrap corruption that if fully exposed would have dire consequences for the entire demoncrap leadership.

      1. They’re quite content at the View with Nancy becoming president via two impeachments.
        If only they could get the Senate and sane Americans to go along with it.
        Can’t beat Trump. Time to add another article of impeachment.

  18. I dunno much, granted, but I’m guessing that the Democrats want a second kick-at-the-can because they realize they screwed it up the first time. As currently constituted, this thing has no legs. A dud.

    I like one of the old lines that used to be used around here (Occam, I think it was), namely, “Never ascribe to malice what can be explained by stupidity.”

    I get that Sundance believes that there is a play here — and he’s right, in a sense: the Democrats certainly want (a) Grand Jury testimony re: the Mueller investigation unsealed (which won’t happen, as there were no criminal referrals, except for George Papadopoulos) and (b) executive privilege thrown over the side (re: McGahn’s testimony on everything; this could be tougher, I suppose, but why does a President, in respect of his office, have government paid-for counsel, if not private and confidential?).

    I like what Bill Barr has certainly approved, inter alia, in the DOJ submission: “Why would the courts want to insinuate themselves into the mess?” Very reserved and understated — not to mention, very persuasive — and it would ultimately arrive on the doorstep of SCOTUS, should the lower courts agree to take it up, in maybe, oh, I don’t know, 2022 or something, for a final decision.

    I’m much more interested in what Alan Dershowitz, Andy McCarthy and Jonathan Turley have to say on this stuff than anything that Nancy Pelosi has to say, assuming she can even spit it out.

    Another Occam: “Never interrupt the enemy with she is making a mistake.”

    1. DeMarxists are hoping to “uncover” some juicy scandal to pin on Trump during the election campaign.
      As before they’re fishing, hoping to land a whopper, but so far have only caught guppies and minnows.
      I understand Durham is preparing to bring in a big catch. Both sides of the same coin.
      Deflect very bad news on the criminal front while continue to demand every bit of evidence for unpresidential Donald.
      That worked so well in 2016. Let them do their worst. Never interrupt your enemy when they’re making a poor maneuver.

      1. Not disagreeing with you, in the least, but why wouldn’t the Democrats, in the scenario you describe, just wait for John Durham’s announcement, instead of just running off to the courts?

    2. Never attribute to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity – Hanlon’s Razor

      Never interrupt an enemy when he is making a mistake – Napoleon Bonaparte

  19. I think the democratic Impeachment clown show will go on for the same reason it went on in the past. It’s the best form of obstruction that they have. They cannot determine whether or not Trump will run again, and they have no candidate who shows any sign that he or she would defeat Trump next year. Biden is out because he is increasingly senile and his son is at the heart of the Ukraine mess. Pocahontas is fading for general dishonesty. Buttigieg nailed her effectively in the last debate on big money influence. He, unfortunately, has never run for a state-wide office. I guess the rest of the debate participants are hoping for a plane crash on their next debate venue that will somehow spare only themselves.

  20. Pelosi isn’t sending the impeachment articles to Senate for trial because it takes a 60% Senate vote to carry impeachment and the Republicans are the majority in the Senate. That would be the end of the whole exercise.

    No, the plan is to let these impeachment articles just sit there like a turd in the punchbowl and stink the place up in 2020 when there is a Presidential election coming.

    1. Actually 66.67%, two thirds, or 67 Senate votes required to remove POTUS from office.

      IOW, DOA despite DeMarxist bleating about GOP reaching prior conclusions. Best political projectors of all time.

      We have halfpeachment from the orangepeachment of Dems’ hamsandwichpeachment, soon to be their manypeachment.

  21. There was an old quote about never ascribing to malice that which can be explained by stupidity. Watching
    this cluster of clowns playing at impeachment convinces me that every one of them knows as much about the
    United States Constitution as Greta the Magic Retard knows about climate science. In what alternative universe
    does “I heard it from someone, who heard it from someone, who overheard a telephone call by someone else”
    constitute evidence or grounds for impeachment? This whole partisan sham could be nullified in the federal
    courts.

  22. The Senate has ton of documentary evidence addressing Democrat corruption and should enter all of it claiming Trump is justified to pursue it beginning with QuidProJoe and son. Examples include Biden’s extortion video, documentation of Hunters “employment” by Burisma, affidavit from the Ukrainian prosecutor, video of Clapper’s perjury, transcript of FISA judge’s condemnation of FBI deceit in warrant application, and much, much more. Unlike in the House where inadmissible hearsay was intended to establish an offense, hearsay in the Senate trial would be admissible and used to establish Trump’s state of mind; i.e., that he was immersed in a hotbed of corruption. Thus, no abuse of power. Rather a duty to get to the bottom of it.

    The only live witness ought to be the “whistleblower” to expose Schiff and the crooked Intelligence IG.

    To hell with “House Managers.” That’s a rule not a constitutional requirement. If McConnell let’s them in, they should be confined to presenting the House record.

    1. Yes but there are still a few of the take the high road losers in the Senate which could bite into the required 51 votes.

      I would let Nancy sit on it as long as she wants, and the Dems stew on their own juices, then open up several Senate committees to look into the sordid affair, from the recycled Russia lies to the Ukraine hoax.

  24. Keeping the articles of impeachment frozen in the House while threatening to add more is designed to paralyze the Chief Executive, because he knows that anything he does can be called an impeachable offense by a House which has already shown its willingness to create crimes out of thin air. This strategy has only one flaw: The Democrats are dealing with Trump, who will ignore them and continue doing his job.

  25. 66% of all Presidents impeached were impeached for humiliating Hillary Clinton.
    Napoleon Trombonopart

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation